An additional problem with dairy, which is the same as plant fats is that they contain medium and short term fatty acids which metabolize different than the long chain fatty acids found in meat. Carb restriction mimics the metabolism of starvation (calorie restriction), yet eating fat from meat more so than eating fat from dairy or plants. If eating only fat from meat then metabolism stays pretty much the same whether you are either eating or fasting.

Perhaps dairy stops people from fully becoming 'fat adapted' since the fats in dairy are not utilized exactly the same way for energy as stored body fat though the fat from meat is (since it is body fat).

I ate zero carb cooked meat and didn't get scurvy. The idea is that Vitamin C doesn't prevent scurvy rather that hydroxylysine and hydroxyproline do and that through oxidation vitamin C can create hydroxylysine and hydroxyproline from the amino acids lysine and proline. Meat however already contains hydroxylysine and hydroxyproline ready to use. An average diet may not have enough meat in it to meet the body's hydroxylysine and hydroxyproline needs and requires some vitamin C.
http://blog.plantpoisonsandrottenstuff.info/2006/09/04/why-meat-prevents-scurvy/

The 1 big hassle I have wiith eating raw meat is the absolute need to clear out every last tiny bit of raw meat sticking in my teeth. I don't chew much, sometimes not at all, but, even so, I invariably end up with my various front teeth having bits of white stuck in them all over, requiring some time to get rid of with floss-sticks.

I notice that food more often gets stuck in between the teeth of mine that aren't straight than other places. Similar for you?

There is no need to tell them. Sometimes when buying meat the butcher suggests things such as this is a good cut for whole roasting or something like that. I just be polite. say thanks pay and move on.

Fat and protein are not natural fuels, that's why the body hates using them for energy and tries to avoid it as much as possible.

The body stores excess energy regardless of where it comes from as fat, it does not avoid using fat. It chooses to have most of its energy reserves as fat so how did you draw such a conclusion?

The body burns the least important things for fuel first i.e. Sugar. Then turns to fat, muscle and finally organs.

A lion will burn sugar for energy before fat if it eats carbohydrates (which it of course can, in fact cats fed carbohydrate based diets such as pets, suffer all the health problems that plague humans eating SAD - no coincidence)

I drink a normal amount. Maybe a bit less because I am not thirsty between meals.

Where was that said about the Inuit?

Certainly the idea of 'survival of the fittest' no longer exists with humans, everyone is given a chance.

But can genetics change once one is born? If someone is born unadapted to modern foods for example then these genetics are passed on to the next generation who would also then be unadapted to the foods. The exposure to the foods after their genetics/DNA has been determined doesn't help future generations. There would need to be a group of people with just a lucky set of genes/DNA that made them better adapted to these foods, and for them to reproduce more while standard people reproduce less. Man's DNA is the same as it was 10, 000 years ago. We are virtually just as unadapted to modern foods as the first people who ever ate them, perhaps a bit of natural selection but since agriculture emerged very little. Any type of natural selection has probably been more related to wealth than health, and today virtually none.

Is it evolution if nothing is changing?

99.999% of people in the world don't use the Bates method, so when they do close reading it does damage their vision if they are prone to myopia. I agree that the Bates method sounds good and plan to try it myself, but my statement was correct for all practical purposes, so let's not pick nits please.

I think that's a bit of a stretch to say 99.999% of people don't use the bates method. The bates method is meant to teach you to develop good habits. Many people don't need to do the bates method because they already have good vision/eye habits so reading close shouldn't damage their eyesight. Eyesight degeneration from poor diet for example is probably misdiagnosed as being caused by reading close.

If it's vision habits causing vision loss I tend to think that vision loss wouldn't slowly degenerate but the effect be immediate. Meaning that if you have perfect vision then your eye muscles must be working properly so vision loss must be a result of poor nutrition. But then again not many people probably have perfect vision, and just how 'bad' do your habits have to be to cause vision to degenerate? Though why did less than 2% of the traditional Inuit have even any detectable Myopia? Yet now myopia is far greater in Inuit 30 years or younger than the elderly Inuit. And as discussed by Bates in the book, traditional people did lots of close work with art, tools, pottery etc and these people obviously did not study the Bates method.

I have decent vision, but very bad  near vision habits, but it's not causing a slow degeneration in vision (yet?). If I have to stare at something very close for a long time my distance vision becomes significantly worse immediately, but after a night's sleep returns to normal.

I've read the bates method, but I still don't seem to be able to apply it habitually, and some techniques I am still confused regarding how to even apply them at all. I have noticed an improvement in eyesight at times when trying the bates method though I have also noticed better eyesight as a result from RAF + fasting so it seems there is definitely more to eyesight improvement than muscle relaxation as discussed in the book. I do know that prominent Bates practitioners now emphasize that diet is an important complement to the bates method.

This forum is a joke.

Then fuck off?

k thx

yes I wish Australia had an equivalent of Slankers 

I can get grass fed meats but only a limited selection and more expensive. I could travel to a farm but that is quite inconvenient.

spam

Sorry, did not read.

if you are seriously concerned I would advise you to go zero carb but lower your overall calories. I don't think just adding fruit to the rest of your diet will do anything but you'll find out I guess.